Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ron Bennett
On a related note ... who decides what is suitable for children - nudity for example is ok in many countries; cultural differences is among the main reasons .kids.US was created instead of .KIDS
In my view, any TLD, such as .XXX and .KIDS, that's intended to explicitely restrict content is a BAD idea and asking for trouble.
|
yes, .KIDS will have similar issues as .XXX, and while they are birds of a feather in the idea of some kind of restricting of content, how this "restricition" is done is very different.
Yes, there will have to be something like an IFFOR that ICM proposed that would have to basically play registry god and decide which websites are able to get a .KIDS domain.
I think that guideliness can be crafted that define what is "kid friendly".
While nudity in some other countries is more acceptable (and age of consent is lower, etc) , it doesn't pose an issue to .KIDS.. the guildelines would probably forbid such content.
I am defining "kids" to the ages of 13 and under (pre-pubescent), who are most likely, could be "harmed" by graphic content.
Telling parents to not let their kids on the internet is not a solution. Current blocking software that parents install are not effective solutions.
Having .KIDS as a whitelisting blocking approach, would absolutely give kids a safer experience on the web.
So if some website that deals with sex education, and feels that kids should know about sex related issues doesn't get a .KIDS domain.. big deal... no one is going to cry for him.. not the ACLU, EFF , or FSC. A hate-speech website would not be able to get .KIDS, etc.
There is a massive movement of legislation at both the state and federal levels that seeks to restrict or remove porn from the web.
If a happy-medium technological solution is not produced, then legislation and prosecutions will be the tools that are used.
So .KIDS does provide for a technological solution to truly keep kids away from the "bad stuff", and i believe, would appease all those looking to do away with porn.
Look at Utah and Michigan with their new laws to require ANYONE who sends out emails to scrub against their list, to ensure they are not contacting children.
This kind of blacklisting scrubbing is expensive and a logistical nightmare.
Imagine that if the filtering was just that if the domain extension on the email was .KIDS that you don't send to it. so
[email protected] would easily be removed from anyone's list.
For spam .KIDS wouldn't be as big of a solution as for web, because there will be people who will spam a .KIDS address, and there will be those that would specifically target a .KIDS address...
But if congress can make can-spam, they could also amend it for the .KIDS extension, and if anyone violates it, then law enforcement has the means to deal with those companies.
The "lawlessness" of the internet are becoming smaller, and being pushed into more remote countries, as there is globalization of business and society, and issues like access to porn is of great concern to all countries.
Fight the soapbox!